Originally posted by Miguel And that reputation has been around for decades. I remember showing my then new K10D to a few retired photographer friends, a few of whom shot Pentax 645 and 6x7 in the day. They started recounting how Pentax shooters in the 60s and 70s were perceived to be "cheapskates" (they used the same word) compared with Nikon shooters.
M
This is very true. The problem is that the camera/lens industry (like so many other industries) has changed. Everything is a commodity and companies don't have the patience or margins to deal with anything they can't sell a whole lot of. There are parallels in the auto industry.
Remember when most cars were available in both two-door and four-door form? No? Get me a younger crowd.
. The four-doors always outsold the two-doors, on a 70-30% or even 80-20% ratio. And the automakers were fine with that. 20 or 30 percent of the market for Impalas or Chevelles was still a decent number.
Today, GM makes the Camaro and Corvette with two doors. Ford makes the Mustang. Everything else from those companies is a four-door model except for some pick-up trucks (and even two-door trucks are on their way out). Why? Competition is now global and margins are squeezed too hard for the industry to be bothered with anything that doesn't sell really big. So if 70-80 percent of auto buyers want four doors, we all get four doors.
A long time ago, third-party lensmakers were happy to do a run of their products in K-mount. Today, they're simply squeezed too hard (they're even smaller than most camera makers or camera divisions) to get involved with Pentax. The exception, of course, is when Pentax signs a contract for enough of a given lens in K mount to make it worth their while. These lenses are sold under the Pentax name and are priced considerably higher than the corresponding Tamron or Sigma. Because they have to be. Or we won't get that lens at all.